DOCSLIB.ORG

OCTAVE Threat Profiles

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
OCTAVE Threat Profiles OCTAVESM* Threat Profiles Christopher Alberts and Audrey Dorofee Software Engineering Institute Carnegie Mellon University The Operationally Critical Threat, Asset, and Vulnerability EvaluationSM (OCTAVESM) is an information security risk evaluation that is comprehensive, systematic, and context driven [1]. By following the OCTAVE Method, an organization can make information-protection decisions based on risks to the confidentiality, integrity, and availability of critical information technology (IT) assets. The operational or business units and the IT department work together to address the information security needs of the organization. In this paper, we focus on how to document the threats to the organization’s critical assets by creating a threat profile. 1.0 Background Using a three-phase approach, OCTAVE examines organizational and technology issues to assemble a comprehensive picture of the information security needs of an organization. The phases of OCTAVE are · Phase 1: Build Asset-Based Threat Profiles – This is an organizational evaluation. Staff members within the organization identify important information assets, the threats to those assets, and the security requirements of the assets. They determine what the organization is currently doing to protect its information assets (protection strategy practices) and identify weaknesses in organizational policies and practice (organizational vulnerabilities). · Phase 2: Identify Infrastructure Vulnerabilities – This is an evaluation of the information infrastructure. The key operational components of the information technology infrastructure are identified based on the information gathered during Phase 1 and then examined for weaknesses (technology vulnerabilities) that can lead to unauthorized action. · Phase 3: Develop Security Strategy and Plans – Risks are analyzed in this phase. The information generated by the organizational and information infrastructure evaluations (Phases 1 and 2) are analyzed to identify risks to the organization and to evaluate the risks based on their impact to the organization’s mission. In addition, a protection strategy for the organization and mitigation plans addressing the highest priority risks are developed. The OCTAVE Method is self directed. A small team of the organization’s personnel (called the analysis team) manages the process and analyzes all information. The analysis team is an interdisciplinary team comprising representatives from both the business lines and the IT department of the organization. 2.0 Threat Profile A key aspect of OCTAVE is the identification and analysis of threats to the organization’s assets. A threat is an indication of a potential undesirable event [2]. It refers to a situation in which a person could do something undesirable (an attacker initiating a denial-of-service attack against an organization’s email * Operationally Critical Threat, Asset, and Vulnerability Evaluation and OCTAVE are service marks of Carnegie Mellon University. 1 server) or a natural occurrence could cause an undesirable outcome (a fire damaging an organization’s information technology hardware). Threats consist of the following properties: · asset – something of value to the organization (information in electronic or physical form, information systems, a group of people with unique expertise) · actor – who or what may violate the security requirements (confidentiality, integrity, availability) of an asset. Actors can be from inside or outside the organization. · motive (optional) – indication of whether the actor’s intentions are deliberate or accidental · access (optional) – how the asset will be accessed by the actor (network access, physical access) · outcome – the immediate result of violating the security requirements of an asset (disclosure, modification, destruction, loss, interruption) In the OCTAVE Method, the analysis team creates threat scenarios based on known sources of threat and typical threat outcomes. Threats with a common theme can be grouped together. During OCTAVE, the following standard categories of threat are considered: · human actors using network access – The threats in this category are network-based threats to an organization’s critical assets. They require direct action by a person and can be deliberate or accidental in nature. · human actors using physical access – The threats in this category are physical threats to an organization’s critical assets. They require direct action by a person and can be deliberate or accidental in nature. · system problems – The threats in this category are problems with an organization’s information technology systems. Examples include hardware defects, software defects, unavailability of related enterprise systems, viruses, malicious code, and other system-related problems. · other problems – The threats in this category are problems or situations that are outside the control of an organization. This category of threats includes natural disasters (such as floods, earthquakes, and storms) that can affect an organization’s information technology systems as well as interdependency risks. Interdependency risks include the unavailability of critical infrastructures (telecommunications, electricity, etc.). Other types of threats outside the control of an organization can also be included here. Examples of these threats are power outages, broken water pipes, etc. An organization usually has some control over humans accessing assets over a computer network or by physical means, as well as some control over system problems. The category of other problems is used for those that tend to fall outside the control of the organization. In this category, the effects of the threat can be controlled to some extent, but the source of the threat cannot be controlled. The resulting outcome or effect of these threat scenarios typically falls into these categories: · disclosure or viewing of sensitive information · modification of important or sensitive information · destruction or loss of important information, hardware, or software · interruption of access to important information, software, applications, or services 2 2.1 Visual Representation of the Generic Threat Profile At the end of Phase 1, the analysis team selects the most critical assets to the organization and creates a threat profile for each critical asset. The range of threats to be considered during the evaluation can be represented visually in tree structures; there is one tree structure for each category of threat (as listed in Section 2.0). Collectively, the set of tree structures is called the generic threat profile. Figures 1-4 show the generic threat profile used during OCTAVE. Note that the trees of the generic threat profile are built around the properties of threats. disclosure accidental modification loss, destruction interruption inside disclosure deliberate modification loss, destruction critical network interruption asset access disclosure accidental modification loss, destruction interruption outside disclosure deliberate modification loss, destruction interruption asset access actor motive outcome Figure 1. Human Actors Using Network Access 3 disclosure accidental modification loss, destruction interruption inside disclosure deliberate modification loss, destruction critical physical interruption asset access disclosure accidental modification loss, destruction interruption outside disclosure deliberate modification loss, destruction interruption asset access actor motive outcome Figure 2. Human Actors Using Physical Access 4 disclosure software defects modification loss, destruction interruption disclosure malicious code modification loss, destruction critical interruption asset disclosure system crashes modification loss, destruction interruption disclosure hardware defects modification loss, destruction interruption asset actor outcome Figure 3. System Problems 5 disclosure power supply problems modification loss, destruction interruption disclosure telecommunications modification problems or loss, destruction unavailability critical interruption asset disclosure modification third-party problems or unavailability of third- loss, destruction party systems interruption disclosure natural disasters modification (e.g., flood, fire, tornado) loss, destruction interruption disclosure physical configuration modification or arrangement of loss, destruction buildings, office, or equipment interruption asset actor outcome Figure 4. Other Problems 6 2.2 Extending and Tailoring the Generic Threat Profile The generic threat profile addresses a standard range of threats to critical assets. Prior to the evaluation, it can be tailored to meet the organization’s needs. When tailoring the generic threat profile, the analysis team can · add a new threat category · add new threats to an existing category · delete inapplicable threats from a category · “decompose” or add depth to a threat category For some organizations, the standard categories are sufficient. Other organizations might require additional categories of threat. The categories of threat are contextual and are based on the environment in which an organization must operate. The standard categories are a good starting place. As an organization implements OCTAVE, it will start identifying many unique threats. The unique threats might belong in one of the standard categories, or they might require the creation of new categories. In general, the threat profile should be as complete as necessary and should contain no duplication. The following example addresses
Load more

Recommended publications
  • How to Analyze the Cyber Threat from Drones
    C O R P O R A T I O N KATHARINA LEY BEST, JON SCHMID, SHANE TIERNEY, JALAL AWAN, NAHOM M. BEYENE, MAYNARD A. HOLLIDAY, RAZA KHAN, KAREN LEE How to Analyze the Cyber Threat from Drones Background, Analysis Frameworks, and Analysis Tools For more information on this publication, visit www.rand.org/t/RR2972 Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data is available for this publication. ISBN: 978-1-9774-0287-5 Published by the RAND Corporation, Santa Monica, Calif. © Copyright 2020 RAND Corporation R® is a registered trademark. Cover design by Rick Penn-Kraus Cover images: drone, Kadmy - stock.adobe.com; data, Getty Images. Limited Print and Electronic Distribution Rights This document and trademark(s) contained herein are protected by law. This representation of RAND intellectual property is provided for noncommercial use only. Unauthorized posting of this publication online is prohibited. Permission is given to duplicate this document for personal use only, as long as it is unaltered and complete. Permission is required from RAND to reproduce, or reuse in another form, any of its research documents for commercial use. For information on reprint and linking permissions, please visit www.rand.org/pubs/permissions. The RAND Corporation is a research organization that develops solutions to public policy challenges to help make communities throughout the world safer and more secure, healthier and more prosperous. RAND is nonprofit, nonpartisan, and committed to the public interest. RAND’s publications do not necessarily reflect the opinions of its research clients and sponsors. Support RAND Make a tax-deductible charitable contribution at www.rand.org/giving/contribute www.rand.org Preface This report explores the security implications of the rapid growth in unmanned aerial systems (UAS), focusing specifically on current and future vulnerabilities.
    [Show full text]
  • Five Threats Series: Threat 2 – Ransomware Attack
    405(d) Health Industry Cybersecurity Practices: Managing Threats and Protecting Patients (HICP) Five Threats Series: Threat 2 – Ransomware Attack March 2019 In Partnership With The 405(d) Aligning Health Care Industry Security Practices initiative, along with the Health Industry Cybersecurity Practices: Managing Threats and Protecting Patients (HICP) publication and this engagement are in partnership with the Healthcare & Public Health Sector Coordinating Council (HSCC) 2 Agenda Time Topic Speaker 5 Minutes Opening Remarks & Introductions 5 Minutes CSA Section 405(d)’s Mandate, Purpose, and Desired Goals 5 Minutes HICP Overview 10 Minutes Using HICP and Supporting Resources 40 Minutes Threat 2 – Ransomware Attack and Mitigating Practices 5 Minutes Looking Forward 5 Minutes Upcoming 5 Threats 15 Minutes Questions 3 CSA Section 405(d)’s Mandate, Purpose, and Desired Goals Cybersecurity Act of 2015 (CSA): Legislative Basis CSA Section 405 Improving Cybersecurity in the Health Care Industry Section 405(b): Health Section 405(c): Health Section 405(d): Aligning care industry Care Industry Health Care Industry preparedness report Cybersecurity Task Force Security Approaches 5 Industry-Led Activity to Improve Cybersecurity in the Healthcare and Public Health (HPH) Sector WHAT IS THE 405(d) EFFORT? WHO IS PARTICIPATING? An industry-led process to develop The 405(d) Task Group is consensus-based guidelines, convened by HHS and comprised practices, and methodologies to of over 150 information security strengthen the HPH-sector’s officers, medical professionals, cybersecurity posture against privacy experts, and industry cyber threats. leaders. HOW WILL 405(d) ADDRESS HPH WHY IS HHS CONVENING THIS CYBERSECURITY NEEDS? EFFORT? With a targeted set of applicable To strengthen the cybersecurity & voluntary practices that seeks posture of the HPH Sector, to cost-effectively reduce the Congress mandated the effort in cybersecurity risks of healthcare the Cybersecurity Act of 2015 organizations.
    [Show full text]
  • Vulnerability Management: Overview
    Resource ID: w-013-3774 Cybersecurity Tech Basics: Vulnerability Management: Overview SEAN ATKINSON, CIS™ (CENTER FOR INTERNET SECURITY), WITH PRACTICAL LAW INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY & TECHNOLOGY Search the Resource ID numbers in blue on Westlaw for more. A Practice Note providing an overview of what Design, implementation, or other vendor oversights that create defects in commercial IT products (see Hardware and Software cyber vulnerability management programs Defects). are, how they work, and the key role they play Poor setup, mismanagement, or other issues in the way an in any organization’s information security organization installs and maintains its IT hardware and software components (see Unsecured Configurations). program. This Note discusses common types of Vulnerability management programs address these issues. Other cyber vulnerabilities and core process steps for common vulnerabilities that organizations must also tackle in their implementing and maintaining a vulnerability information security programs include: management program to decrease cybersecurity Gaps in business processes. Human weaknesses, such as lack of user training and awareness. risks. It also addresses common pitfalls that Poorly designed access controls or other safeguards. can lead to unnecessary cyber incidents and Physical and environmental issues. data breaches. Unlike threats, organizations can often directly control their vulnerabilities and therefore minimize the opportunities for threat actors. Most organizations depend on a combination of commercial and custom-developed hardware and software products to support their Organizations that develop their own in-house software should information technology (IT) needs. These technology components use security by design techniques to avoid creating vulnerabilities. inevitably include vulnerabilities in their design, setup, or the code that For more information on assessing overall data security risks and runs them.
    [Show full text]
  • Cyber Threat Metrics
    SANDIA REPORT SAND2012-2427 Unlimited Release Printed March 2012 Cyber Threat Metrics Mark Mateski, Cassandra M. Trevino, Cynthia K. Veitch, John Michalski, J. Mark Harris, Scott Maruoka, Jason Frye Prepared by Sandia National Laboratories Albuquerque, New Mexico 87185 Sandia National Laboratories is a multi-program laboratory managed and operated by Sandia Corporation, a wholly owned subsidiary of Lockheed Martin Corporation, for the U.S. Department of Energy's National Nuclear Security Administration under contract DE-AC04-94AL85000. Approved for public release; further dissemination unlimited Issued by Sandia National Laboratories, operated for the United States Department of Energy by Sandia Corporation. NOTICE: This report was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the United States Government. Neither the United States Government, nor any agency thereof, nor any of their employees, nor any of their contractors, subcontractors, or their employees, make any warranty, express or implied, or assume any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of any information, apparatus, product, or process disclosed, or represent that its use would not infringe privately owned rights. Reference herein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise, does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the United States Government, any agency thereof, or any of their contractors or subcontractors. The views and opinions expressed herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of the United States Government, any agency thereof, or any of their contractors. Printed in the United States of America. This report has been reproduced from the best available copy.
    [Show full text]
  • Sources of Threats and Threats in the Cyber Security
    DAAAM INTERNATIONAL SCIENTIFIC BOOK 2019 pp. 321-330 Chapter 27 SOURCES OF THREATS AND THREATS IN THE CYBER SECURITY JAN SVOBODA, LUDEK LUKAS Abstract: The article presents a brief analysis of selected threats to their sources. The introduction presents the difference between the source of the threat, the threat and the risk. In the next chapter, attention is paid to the most commonly occurring threats in cyberspace and the following are specific sources of threats responsible for individual threats. The actual process of spreading specific threats in cyberspace, the relationship between the threat and the reference object and the difference in targeting the threats towards the reference objects are already listed in the last chapter. Predictions of future threats and necessary protection tools are listed in the final chapter. Key words: Cyberspace, Source of the Threat, Reference Object, Targeted, Omnidirectional Authors´ data: Svoboda, J[an]; Lukas, L[udek], Tomas Bata University in Zlín nám. T. G. Masaryka 5555, 76001 Zlín, CZ, [email protected], [email protected] This Publication has to be referred as: Svoboda, J[an] & Lukas, L[udek] (2019). Sources of Threats and Threats in the Cyber Security, Chapter 27 in DAAAM International Scientific Book 2019, pp.321-330, B. Katalinic (Ed.), Published by DAAAM International, ISBN 978-3-902734-24-2, ISSN 1726-9687, Vienna, Austria DOI: 10.2507/daaam.scibook.2019.27 321 Svoboda, J. & Lukas, L.: Sources of Threats and Threats in the Cyber Security 1. Introduction Cyber security is a relatively new field of security, and so cyber security is associated with progressive developments and a wide range of threat sources.
    [Show full text]
  • Counter-Phishing Recommendations for Federal Agencies
    CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT GUIDE Counter-Phishing Recommendations for Federal Agencies AUDIENCE AND SCOPE AT-A-GLANCE This guide recommends technical capabilities to protect federal agency email systems and networks against malicious phishing emails. RECOMMENDATIONS This guide provides information to inform federal agencies’ executive Secure Email Gateway Capabilities leadership (senior risk official, chief information officers, and chief o Deploy email filters information security officers) and also provides sufficient detail to o Deploy sandboxing or detonation support a technical discussion with implementation teams. chambers This guide is applicable—outside of federal agencies—to state, local, Protect Outbound Web-Browsing tribal, and territorial governments and commercial industry. o Block known malicious sites and Capacity Enhancement Guides support CISA’s role as the Nation’s top-level domains cybersecurity risk advisor by sharing high-priority recommendations, o Block specific file types from best practices, and operational insights in response to systemic threats, leaving the network vulnerabilities, and risks. Harden User Endpoints o Employ multi-factor authentication INTRODUCTION o Secure browsers Protect Endpoints Email systems are the preferred attack vector for malicious phishing Block malicious macros by default campaigns. Recent reporting shows 32 percent of breaches involve o Deploy antivirus software and phishing attacks, and 78 percent of cyber-espionage incidents are enabled o host-based intrusion detection by phishing.i,ii Additionally, cyber attackers often take advantage of current and prevention systems events, and recent phishing and ransomware campaigns have targeted critical infrastructure sectors. Given the recent shift to an extended remote workforce, the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) strongly recommends agencies prioritize the protection of email systems.
    [Show full text]
  • An Asset Based Approach for Industrial Cyber Security
    AN ASSET-BASED APPROACH FOR INDUSTRIAL CYBER SECURITY VULNERABILITY ANALYSIS by Paul Baybutt Primatech Inc. [email protected] 614-841-9800 www.primatech.com A version of this paper appeared in Process Safety Progress, p. 220, December 2003, Vol. 22. No. 4. Abstract A method is described and an example provided for identifying and analyzing threats and vulnerabilities of process plants to attacks on cyber systems by terrorists, saboteurs, and other criminals. The approach considers how cyber assets can be exploited by assailants to cause harm. It defines threat events by pairing threats with cyber assets and considers vulnerabilities to attack, existing countermeasures to protect cyber systems and the need for new or improved countermeasures. Previous security vulnerability analysis (SVA) methods have focused on physical and personnel security. Cyber security has not been addressed explicitly. Studies using the method described can be performed as adjuncts to existing SVAs, as part of future SVAs, or as stand-alone cyber SVAs (CSVA). The method can also be used to consider all types of security issues in a single analysis including physical, personnel, information and cyber security, or one of these areas may be studied individually. Keywords: Cyber security, vulnerability analysis, risk analysis, threat analysis, terrorism Introduction Various Security Vulnerability Analysis (SVA) approaches have been developed to address malevents such as terrorism, sabotage, and other criminal acts in process plants (1,2,3). Malevents are deliberate acts that result in adverse consequences. They are the security equivalent of an accident. SVA estimates the risk of malevents. Vulnerability analysis method (VAM) is an alternative term that has been used to mean the same as SVA.
    [Show full text]
  • Guide to Conducting Cybersecurity Risk Assessment for Critical Information Infrastructure December 2019 Contents
    GUIDE TO CONDUCTING CYBERSECURITY RISK ASSESSMENT FOR CRITICAL INFORMATION INFRASTRUCTURE DECEMBER 2019 CONTENTS 1 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................ 2 1.1 Importance of Cybersecurity Risk Assessment ........................................................................... 2 1.2 Common Problems Observed ........................................................................................................... 2 2 PURPOSE, AUDIENCE & SCOPE ....................................................................................... 4 2.1 Purpose of Document .......................................................................................................................... 4 2.2 Audience & Scope ................................................................................................................................. 4 3 ESTABLISH RISK CONTEXT ............................................................................................... 5 3.1 Define Risk ................................................................................................................................................ 5 3.2 Determine Risk Tolerance ................................................................................................................... 6 3.3 Define Roles and Responsibilities .................................................................................................... 7 4 CONDUCT RISK ASSESSMENT ........................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • The Vulnerability Assessment and Mitigation Methodology / Philip S
    Finding and Fixing Vulnerabilities in Information Systems The Vulnerability Assessment & itigation M Methodology Philip S. Antón Robert H. Anderson Richard Mesic Michael Scheiern Prepared for the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency R National Defense Research Institute Approved for public release; distribution unlimited The research described in this report was sponsored by the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency. The research was conducted in RAND’s National Defense Research Institute, a federally funded research and development center supported by the Office of the Secretary of Defense, the Joint Staff, the unified commands, and the defense agencies under Contract DASW01-01-C-0004. Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Finding and fixing vulnerabilities in information systems : the vulnerability assessment and mitigation methodology / Philip S. Anton ... [et al.]. p. cm. “MR-1601.” ISBN 0-8330-3434-0 (pbk.) 1. Computer security. 2. Data protection. 3. Risk assessment. I. Anton, Philip S. QA76.9.A25F525 2003 005.8—dc21 2003012342 RAND is a nonprofit institution that helps improve policy and decisionmaking through research and analysis. RAND® is a registered trademark. RAND’s pub- lications do not necessarily reflect the opinions or policies of its research sponsors. Cover design by Barbara Angell Caslon © Copyright 2003 RAND All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced in any form by any electronic or mechanical means (including photocopying, recording, or information storage and retrieval) without
    [Show full text]
  • The Emerging Cyber Threat to Industrial Control Systems 03
    02 Lloyd’s disclaimer This report has been co-produced by Lloyd's, CyberCube and Guy Carpenter for general information purposes only. While care has been taken in gathering the data and preparing the report Lloyd's does not make any representations or warranties as to its accuracy or completeness and expressly excludes to the maximum extent permitted by law all those that might otherwise be implied. Lloyd's accepts no responsibility or liability for any loss or damage of any nature occasioned to any person as a result of acting or refraining from acting as a result of, or in reliance on, any statement, fact, figure or expression of opinion or belief contained in this report. This report does not constitute advice of any kind. © Lloyd’s 2021 All rights reserved About Lloyd’s Lloyd's is the world's specialist insurance and reinsurance market. Under our globally trusted name, we act as the market's custodian. Backed by diverse global capital and excellent financial ratings, Lloyd's works with a global network to grow the insured world –building resilience of local communities and strengthening global economic growth. With expertise earned over centuries, Lloyd's is the foundation of the insurance industry and the future of it. Led by expert underwriters and brokers who cover more than 200 territories, the Lloyd’s market develops the essential, complex and critical insurance needed to underwrite human progress. About CyberCube CyberCube delivers the world’s leading cyber risk analytics for the insurance industry. With best-in-class data access and advanced multi-disciplinary analytics, the company’s cloud-based platform helps insurance organizations make better decisions when placing insurance, underwriting cyber risk and managing cyber risk aggregation.
    [Show full text]
  • Computer Security Threat Monitoring and Surveillance
    James P. Anderson Co. Box 42 Fort Washington, Pa. 19034 215 646-4706 COMPUTER SECURITY THREAT MONITORING AND SURVEILLANCE CONTRACT 79F296400 February 26, 1980 Revised: April 15, 1980 ---------- rl"\nC'ttlt'l,...tc- ; ... r"_...- ............ T..-..-L.--1--a· '· TABLE OF CONTENTS l.l In-troduction .................... ·-· ..... ....................... 1 1.2 Background . ... ....................... 1 ., . 1.3 Summary ........................................................ 3 2. Threats ............................... 4 2.1 Scope ••...... ......................... .................. 4 2.2 Gaining Access to the System - External Penetration ............ 6 2.3 Internal Penetration ......................................... 11 2.3.1 The Masquerader ................................................ 11 2.3.2 Legitimate User ............................ 12 2.3.3 Clandestine User ........................... 14 2.3.4 Clandestine user Countermeasures ............................... 14 3. Characterization of Computer Use .............. 17 3.1 Introduction ....................... 17 3.2 The Unit of Computer Work- The Job or Session ••• 17 3. 3 Time Puam.eteJ:""s ......................•........... 18 3.4 Dataset and Program Usage ............................... 23 3.5 Monitor~ng Giles and Devices ........................ 24 3.6 Group Statistics •••••••••••••• ................................. 24 4. Structure of a Surveillance System ••••• 26 4.1 Introduction 26 4.1.1 Monitoring of Users .. ~ . 26 4.1. 2 Sorting Audit Records 26 4.1. 3 Session Record Builder
    [Show full text]
  • Pharming Prevention
    Unified Threat Management White Paper Pharming Prevention ! Alterations to the PC's host file through emailed Cyberoam prevents viruses like the Banker Trojan accomplishes the same goal as DNS poisoning. Since the web browser Sophisticated checks the local host file first and the data in pharming attacks the local host file overrides the information contained in the DNS serves the pharmer can mislead Pharming the next generation of phishing attack, also makes the users to fake sites designed to make them reveal the use of social engineering to obtain access credentials their personal and financial credentials. such as usernames and passwords of the Internet users. A deceptive Internet threat, it is potentially more sinister than phishing because it circumvents the need to entice users into Cyberoam Pharming responding to spam email messages. A pharming attack occurs on a broader front by misdirecting users from Prevention legitimate websites to similar looking mirror sites that have Cyberoam offers highly effective, blended protection from been designed to look and feel like the original. pharming attacks. Spyware Blocker What is Pharming? Cyberoam takes a blended approach to preventing Pharming exploits DNS server vulnerabilities, allowing the spyware which can be a precursor to pharming attacks - hacker to acquire domain names of sites and redirecting the from entering the network. Spyware Blocker prevents site traffic to a mirror site. inbound and outbound traffic to sites like P2P and other known spyware carriers. WebCat, Cyberoam site These bogus websites collect sensitive personal user database, has a constantly updated spyware category with information such as account IDs, usernames, passwords and comprehensive listing of such sites, ensuring reliable credit card details and send it across to the pharmer all access prevention.
    [Show full text]